A method for assessing the quality of life of cancer patients: replication of the factor structure

Delayed nausea and vomiting continue to reduce patients' quality of life after highly and moderately emetogenic chemotherapy despite antiemetic treatment

PURPOSE

Chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting (CINV) are major adverse effects of cancer chemotherapy. We compared the impact of acute (during the first 24 hours postchemotherapy) and delayed (days 2 through 5 postchemotherapy) CINV on patients' quality of life (QoL) after highly or moderately emetogenic chemotherapy (HEC and MEC, respectively).

PATIENTS AND METHODS

This prospective, multicenter, multinational study was conducted in 14 medical practices on cancer patients undergoing either HEC or MEC treatment. Patients recorded episodes of nausea and vomiting in a diary. Patients completed the Functional Living Index-Emesis (FLIE) questionnaire at baseline and on day 6.

RESULTS

A total of 298 patients were assessable (67 HEC patients, 231 MEC patients). Emesis was reported by 36.4% of patients (13.2% acute, 32.5% delayed) and nausea by 59.7% (36.2% acute, 54.3% delayed). HEC patients reported significantly lower mean FLIE total score than MEC patients (95.5 v 107.8 respectively; P = .0049). Among all patients, the nausea score was significantly lower than the vomiting score (50.0 and 55.3, respectively; P = .0097). Of the 173 patients who experienced neither vomiting nor nausea during the first 24 hours postchemotherapy, 22.9% reported an impact of CINV on daily life caused by delayed CINV.

CONCLUSION

CINV continues to adversely affect patients' QoL despite antiemetic therapy even after treatment with only moderately emetogenic chemotherapy regimens, and even in the subgroup of patients who do not experience nausea and vomiting during the first 24 hours. On the basis of the FLIE results in this study, nausea had a stronger negative impact on patients' daily lives than vomiting.

Edmonton symptom assessment scale: Italian validation in two palliative care settings

In the palliative care setting, the Edmonton Symptom Assessment Scale (ESAS) was developed for use in daily symptom assessment of palliative care patients. ESAS considers the presence and severity of nine symptoms common in cancer patients: pain, tiredness, nausea, depression, anxiety, drowsiness, appetite, well-being and shortness of breath plus an optional tenth symptom, which can be added by the patient. The aim of this study was to validate the Italian version of ESAS and to evaluate an easy quality of life monitoring system that uses a patient's self-rating symptom assessment in two different palliative care settings: in-patients and home patients. Eighty-three in-patients and 158 home care patients were enrolled. In the latter group, the Italian validated version of the Symptom Distress Scale (SDS) was also administered at the admission of the patients. The two groups of patients have similar median survival, demographic and clinical characteristics, symptom prevalence and overall distress score at baseline. ESAS shows a good concurrent validity with respect to SDS. The correlation between the physical items of ESAS and SDS was shown to be higher than the correlation between the psychological items. The association of ESAS scores and performance status (PS) showed a trend: the higher the symptom score was, the worse was the PS level. Test-retest evaluation, applied in the in-patient group, showed good agreement for depression, well-being and overall distress and a moderate agreement for all the other items. In conclusion, ESAS can be considered a valid, reliable and feasible instrument for physical symptom assessment in routine "palliative care" clinical practice with a potentially different responsiveness in different situations or care settings.

Illusions in advanced cancer: The effect of belief systems and attitudes on quality of life

Patients with advanced cancer frequently express positive attitudes and can be unduly optimistic about the potential benefits of treatment. In order to evaluate an illusory domain in the context of advanced cancer, we developed a scale of will to live and characterized the beliefs that patients held about the curability of their cancer, and how committed they were to using alternative treatments. A measure of quality of life was used as the dependent variable in order to assess the association between these attributes. After a preliminary exploration confirmed the presence of an illusory domain, these concepts were prospectively tested in 149 ambulant patients with advanced cancer who attended for palliative systemic treatment, radiation treatment or supportive care. The scale of global quality of life was reliable (Cronbach's alpha coefficient 0.72). The distribution of the scores of will to live was skewed, with no respondent scoring poorly, and the scale was reliable (Cronbach's alpha coefficient 0.82). The scale of belief in curability showed diverse beliefs. In some cases, there was a discrepancy between respondents' beliefs in curability and what they believed to be the report by their doctors. There was also an association between a committed use of alternative treatments and a belief in the curability of the cancer (p<0.001). In a multiple regression analysis, both will to live and performance status remained associated with better quality of life scores after adjustment for other relevant variables (p<0.05 and <0.001, respectively). These results suggest that positive illusory beliefs can be measured and are an important component of adaption for some patients with advanced cancer. Furthermore, this illusory domain may influence the perception and measurement of quality of life.

A taxonomy of the uses of health-related quality-of-life instruments in cancer care and the clinical meaningfulness of the results

OBJECTIVES

To propose a taxonomy of psychometrically based, health-related quality-of-life instruments related to three levels of decision-making of health care: the macro, meso and micro levels. The choice of appropriate health-related quality-of-life instruments for each level of desired decision making in various clinical settings is illustrated. A secondary objective was to describe solutions for some of the difficulties inherent in the interpretation of the results of health-related quality-of-life assessment.

DESIGN

The three main levels of clinical decision making are listed and the instruments used most frequently in cancer clinical trials are reviewed from the medical literature.

PROPOSALS

Generic and utility-based instruments are likely to be the most valuable at the macro level of decision making, whereas condition-specific, disease-specific, and situation-specific instruments are most useful for decision making at the meso and micro levels. A determination of the proportions of patients who have reached a meaningful change in health-related quality-of-life scores (eg, > or =10 for scales of 1-100) over a standard period is a rational approach to interpreting the significance of changes in scores.

CONCLUSIONS

Awareness of the level of decision making that is involved in the clinical assessment of health-related quality of life can be helpful in choosing instruments that are appropriate for various clinical settings. Some of the difficulties in interpreting the meaning of changes in health-related quality-of-life scores can be overcome by comparing the proportions of patients who have achieved a preset magnitude of change.

Detecting social problems in cancer patients

Diagnosis of and treatment for cancer may not only create physical and emotional difficulties for patients but may also have an impact on social aspects of patients' lives. Screening for social problems has not become part of routine oncology practice. This may be due to lack of a suitable questionnaire. This paper presents a psychometric analysis of the Problems Checklist with a view to assessing its usefulness as a screening tool for social problems in oncology. Evaluation was undertaken using data from an earlier study of 505 patients who completed the checklist. Frequency of endorsement, missing values, factor analysis and reliability and validity analysis of the summated scales were carried out. Missing data rates ranged from 4 to 18% over the 16 items. Fourteen items were well endorsed. Factor analysis produced a four-factor structure with components labelled daily living, relationships, economics and emotions. Reliability and validity tests endorsed the factor structure with the components on economics and emotions being particularly credible. Difficulties with relationships are harder to measure and results from the analysis suggest that this is an area that warrants further investigation. The checklist is a useful tool for highlighting problems. As a tool for screening for social problems it has some limitations.

Report on the quality of life analysis from the phase III trial of pion versus photon radiotherapy in locally advanced prostate cancer

This report examines the quality of life (QOL) of 215 patients entered into a randomised trial between pion and photon radiotherapy for prostate cancer at a single institution. The survival and local control results of the trial were equivalent in both arms. A modification of the Rotterdam Symptom Checklist (RSCL) was used to assess QOL. Global QOL, toxicity and physical scores were found to be worse in pion-treated patients at the end of treatment (P<0.001, P<0.001, and P=0.02 respectively). There are no long-term differences in the QOL of pion- versus photon-treated patients. Sexual function was a concern for patients even at baseline. There was a progressive loss of sexual interest and erectile function. There was a significant impact from hormonal therapy at relapse. Hormonal treatment produced a stepwise significant worsening in global QOL, particularly for physical and psychological domains.

Effect of neurological dysfunction on health-related quality of life in patients with high-grade glioma

The purpose of the study was to assess health-related quality of life (HQL) in patients with high-grade malignant glioma of the brain. The EORTC core Quality of Life Questionnaire (QLQ-C30) and a Brain Cancer Module (BCM20) were administered at baseline and several weeks later (follow-up) to 105 patients with either recently-diagnosed (n = 41) or recurrent (n = 64) malignant glioma. In addition, the attending neurologists completed a standard neurological examination, a modified Barthel Activities of Daily Living Index (BADLI) and the Karnofsky Performance Scale (KPS). In a preliminary step, the QLQ-C30 was found to have acceptable reliability (internal consistency and test-retest reliability). Newly-diagnosed patients and those with a KPS of 80-100 had significantly better physical, role and cognitive functioning and global quality of life with less fatigue, visual disorder, motor dysfunction, communication deficit, weakness of both legs and trouble controlling the bladder than did those with recurrent disease and those with a KPS of 50-70. Similarly, those capable of independent activities of daily living, as reported on the BADLI, had higher functioning scores and less fatigue than did those who were not independent. Patients with dysphasia, mental confusion or motor deficit on neurological examination reported significantly lower levels of physical, role, cognitive, emotional and social functioning and global quality of life than did patients not having these difficulties. They also had significantly more symptoms. In patients with deteriorating neurological status between baseline and follow-up, there was a marked decline in cognitive, physical, role, emotional and social functioning and global quality of life and an increase in fatigue. Thus, there are significant differences in HQL between patients with newly-diagnosed and recurrent brain cancer and between patients with differing KPS and BADLI scores. In addition, the HQL scores provide details not provided by the KPS and the BADLI. Deterioration in neurological function is accompanied by significant deterioration in a range of HQL domains and in global quality of life.

The influence of personal expectations on cancer patients' reports of health-related quality of life

The role of personal expectations on reports of health-related quality of life (HRQL) in the context of a set of other variables commonly thought to affect patient report of HRQL was examined. The complete set of predictor variables included: (1) patient factors including age, gender, race, education, income, insurance type, living arrangement and expectations; and (2) clinical factors namely performance status rating (PSR), diagnosis and disease stage. The outcome measures included five dimensions of HRQL (relationship with physician, physical, social, emotional and functional well being) and an overall measure of HRQL. Five variables (PSR, expectation rating, age, living arrangement and managed care enrollment) exerted significant effects on the summated rating of HRQL. Older cancer patients, those living with others, those enrolled in managed care organizations and those who report better-than-expected experience are more likely to have a higher overall HRQL. In addition to treating the disease itself, quality of life can possibly be enhanced by narrowing the disparities between individuals' expectations and what actually occurs. Patients would likely therefore benefit from being encouraged to set and maintain realistic goals concerning their cancer prognosis and treatment process.

Quality of life in patients with ovarian cancer: current state of research

Ovarian cancer is the most malignant cancer in women, where it is the fifth leading cause of cancer-related death. The disease and its treatment have considerable effects on the quality of life of patients with this cancer. This study reviews existing literature on quality of life in patients with ovarian cancer to demonstrate the importance of the topic, to comment on improvements achieved and to consider their implications for the implementation of optimal treatment. A literature search was carried out through MEDLINE and of published papers on quality of life in patients with ovarian cancer from 1976 to 1994. Twenty papers have been reviewed, of which, 10 were treatment-related assessments of quality of life and the remaining 10 dealt with different topics including psychometric issues in measuring health-related quality of life. Twenty-four instruments were employed to measure quality of life. Of these, the Rotterdam Symptom Checklist (RSCL) and The European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer Core Quality of Life Questionnaire (EORTC QLQ-C30) were found to be the most appropriate. Although meta-analysis of results is impossible, it appears that debulking surgery followed by platinum-based chemotherapy could improve both quality of life and survival. In addition to effective and efficient treatment, psychological counselling, palliative and home care, nutritional support and pain relief are the most important areas for improving quality of life of patients with ovarian cancer. Knowledge and insight into the quality of life of patients with ovarian cancer are still limited, and a large carefully planned international study is required. Use of existing standard measures is preferable and agreement should be reached on a selected single instrument.

Measuring the meaning of life for patients with incurable cancer: the life evaluation questionnaire (LEQ)

Clinical observation, systematic research and popular anecdote indicate that, when confronted by death, people change the criteria by which they evaluate their lives. Questionnaires used routinely to assess quality of life in people with poor-prognosis cancer tend to be symptom-based and do not assess factors which become important when confronted by fatal illness, such as the meaning of life and the degree to which life has been enriched by the illness. To develop a questionnaire which would be sensitive to these areas, patients with incurable cancer and carers of such patients were interviewed in depth. Responses were reviewed by a panel of patients, clinicians and carers and formed into an inventory which was completed by 200 similar patients. Principal components analysis identified five dimensions: clearer perception of the meaning of life; freedom versus restriction of life; resentment of the illness; contentment with past and present life; past and present social integration. Only the most symptom-oriented scales (freedom, resentment) correlated with the Rotterdam Symptom Checklist. Scale scores showed that younger patients were more resentful of their illness, but also gained a clearer perception of the meaning of life. This questionnaire can evaluate psychological needs of people with incurable cancer which are neglected by existing instruments.

Measuring the effect of cancer on health-related quality of life

Measuring health-related quality of life in patients with cancer has focused primarily on the development of reliable and valid instruments (questionnaires), and on the effect of chemotherapy in phase III clinical trials. From this research several important lessons have emerged, such as: (i) the need to measure multiple domains; (ii) the importance of self-rating; (iii) the reports of counter-intuitive results; (iv) the ability to quantify the effects of symptoms on health-related quality of life; and (v) the prognostic value of health-related quality of life measurement for survival. Many challenges lie ahead. Among these are the difficulties encountered by medical clinicians in choosing appropriate instruments to measure health-related quality of life, the dilemma of choosing between aggregate scores and domain scores, questions surrounding the significance of results, and whether measurement of health-related quality of life is now at a point where it can be used in routine practice outside of the clinical trials setting. Although further research is required in all of these and other areas, the future for health-related quality-of-life measurement in oncology is promising.

The Karnofsky Performance Status Scale re-examined: a cross-validation with the EORTC-C30

A cross-validation of the Karnofsky Performance Status (KPS) and quality of life (QOL) as measured by item 30 of the quality of life questionnaire developed by the European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer Study Group (EORTC QLQ-C30) was conducted using ordered logit analysis and prospective data from a continuous sample of 139 lung cancer patients. The QOL is found to be a much broader concept than the KPS, since it likely captures not only physical functioning but also functioning in the non-physical dimensions of social, emotional, and possibly cognitive well-being as well as the level of distress in the physical dimensions of pain, breathing and fatigue. These results suggest that the palliative treatment of advanced cancer and the terminally ill should be guided by a broad concept of well-being that goes beyond one based only on physical functioning.

Quality of life in chronic anemia of cancer during treatment with recombinant human erythropoietin

BACKGROUND

Improvements in quality of life after treatment with recombinant human erythropoietin (rHuEPO) often have been reported in patients with end-stage renal disease. In patients with chronic anemia of cancer, comparatively few systemic investigations have been performed.

METHODS

Various aspects of quality of life were self-reported on linear analogue scales of a slightly modified questionnaire that was first developed to assess toxicity of chemotherapy in patients with breast cancer. Thirty-four patients with chronic anemia of cancer completed 10 items (feelings of well-being, mood, level of activity, pain, nausea, appetite, physical ability, social activities, anxiety, and helpfulness of therapy) before and after 8 and 12 weeks of rHuEPO therapy.

RESULTS

Patients with response to the therapy significantly improved after 8 weeks of treatment in some items and after 12 weeks in all items. Patients with no response also had some improvement after 12 weeks of therapy. Hemoglobin levels correlated strongly with mood and appetite. World Health Organization (WHO) performance status improved significantly in patients with response but tended to diminish in those without. Median survival was 4.1 months in patients with no response and 12.0 months in those with response. After 12 weeks of therapy, the scores of the items "physical ability" and "social activities" proved to be significant prognostic factors, which surpassed the prognostic power of the WHO performance status.

CONCLUSIONS

The results of rHuEPO therapy in chronic anemia of cancer are far more than cosmetics of laboratory values. They enable the patients with response to lead a physically and socially more active life with less anxiety, brighter moods, and an increased general feeling of well-being.

Quality of life assessment in palliative care

Palliative care aims to improve the quality of life of patients through attention to physical, psychological, social and spiritual distress. Assessment of quality of life, expressed as a global score, is difficult because patients are too ill for long interviews, but relatives and professionals are poor proxy respondents for patients. Quality of life assessment tools must be multidimensional, considering both physical and psychosocial issues, must be quick and easy to administer and score and must be sufficiently sensitive to detect changes with time. Quality of life assessment has audit and routine clinical uses; it is an essential consideration in any research involving the patient with advanced cancer. The different types of questionnaire assessment tool are discussed in detail.

Assessment of palliative chemotherapy: a step beyond response

In summary, tumour response is a useful index of cytotoxic activity, but is of limited value in the assessment of benefit to the patient following treatment with cytotoxic drugs. Survival is a similarly inappropriate endpoint to assess the clinical benefits of palliative cytotoxic therapy. The widespread introduction of QL assessment as a primary outcome measure in cancer therapy will enhance our understanding of the value of a wide range of established cancer treatments, not only that of palliative chemotherapy, but also surgery and radiotherapy.